Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                       Calendar No. 918
106th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     106-469
_______________________________________________________________________





MODIFYING THE DATE ON WHICH THE MAYOR OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
  SUBMITS A PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN TO CONGRESS, AND FOR OTHER 
  PURPOSES

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

         COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE

                              to accompany

                                 S.3062

TO MODIFY THE DATE ON WHICH THE MAYOR OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
  SUBMITS A PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN TO CONGRESS, AND FOR OTHER 
  PURPOSES




October 3 (legislative day, September 22), 2000.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
79-010                     WASHINGTON : 2000

                   COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                   FRED THOMPSON, Tennessee, Chairman
WILLIAM V. ROTH, Jr., Delaware       JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
TED STEVENS, Alaska                  CARL LEVIN, Michigan
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine              DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
GEORGE VOINOVICH, Ohio               RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico         ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey
THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi            MAX CLELAND, Georgia
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania          JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina
JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire
             Hannah S. Sistare, Staff Director and Counsel
                       Johanna L. Hardy, Counsel
   Kristine I. Simmons, Staff Director, Subcommittee on Oversight of 
   Government Management, Restructuring and the District of Columbia
Mason C. Alinger, Professional Staff Member, Subcommittee on Oversight 
 of Government Management, Restructuring, and the District of Columbia
      Joyce A. Rechtschaffen, Minority Staff Director and Counsel
          Peter A. Ludgin, Minority Professional Staff Member
Marianne Upton, Minority Chief Counsel/Staff Director, Subcommittee on 
 Oversight of Government Management, Restructuring and the District of 
                                Columbia
                     Darla D. Cassell, Chief Clerk
                                                       Calendar No. 918
106th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     106-469

======================================================================



 
MODIFYING THE DATE ON WHICH THE MAYOR OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
  SUBMITS A PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN TO CONGRESS, AND FOR OTHER 
  PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

October 3 (legislative day, September 22), 2000.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Thompson, from the Committee on Governmental Affairs, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 3062]

    The Committee on Governmental Affairs, to which was 
referred the bill (S. 3062) to modify the date on which the 
Mayor of the District of Columbia submits a performance 
accountability plan to Congress, and for other purposes, 
reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that 
the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

  I. Summary and Purpose..............................................1
 II. Background.......................................................2
III. Legislative History..............................................3
 IV. Section-by-Section Analysis......................................4
  V. Estimated Cost of Legislation....................................4
 VI. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact..................................5
VII. Changes in Existing Law..........................................5

                         I. Summary and Purpose

    S. 3062, the District of Columbia Performance 
Accountability Plan Amendments Act of 2000, changes the 
deadline for the District of Columbia to submit its annual 
performance accountability plan to Congress from March 1 of 
each year to be concurrent with the submission of the District 
of Columbia budget to Congress each year. It also replaces the 
reporting requirement that calls for the submission of both an 
acceptable and a superior level of performance with one unified 
measurable, objective and ambitious performance goal. The 
purposes are to bring the District government closer to 
performance budgeting by tying together the District's budget 
with its performance measures, and to allow the District 
government tofocus on achieving a single level of performance 
rather than working to reach multiple performance targets.

                             II. Background

    House Report 104-96 that accompanies Public Law 104-8, the 
``District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management 
Assistance Act of 1995,'' provides a complete background of 
Congress' decision to intervene in the daily proceedings of the 
District government and implement significant management reform 
initiatives. House Report 103-754 that accompanies Public Law 
103-373, the ``Federal Payment Reauthorization Act of 1994,'' 
fully explains the original intent of Congress in establishing 
the performance accountability plans addressed by this 
legislation.
    Among other things, the Federal Payment Reauthorization Act 
of 1994 requires the District to devise, implement, and submit 
to Congress comprehensive financial and performance standards 
that address performance management goals. The primary 
motivation behind the Congressionally mandated performance 
goals for the District was a General Accounting Office (GAO) 
report that identified a number of efforts by the District 
government to balance its books with short-term actions that 
postponed financial solutions and caused greater cash problems. 
The report also cited a widening gap between spending and 
revenue, and it identified several impending capital needs and 
programs for which the District had not adequately planned. At 
a hearing on the financial condition of the District of 
Columbia in 1994, the GAO testified that performance-based 
planning would help the District to address many of the 
problems outlined in the GAO report.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ ``Financial Status: District of Columbia Finances,'' General 
Accounting Office, July 14, 2000, GAO/T-AIMD-94-158.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As a result of the Federal Payment Reauthorization Act of 
1994, the District of Columbia must develop and submit to the 
appropriate House and Senate authorizing and appropriating 
committees and GAO, annual performance accountability plans and 
reports by March 1 of each year. The reports, which assess the 
District's progress in meeting the performance goals 
established in the corresponding fiscal year's performance 
accountability plan, are to be reviewed and evaluated by the 
GAO in consultation with the Office of Management and Budget. 
GAO is required to submit its findings to the Congress by April 
15 of each year.
    On April 14, 2000, the GAO released its evaluation of the 
District's FY1999 performance accountability report. The GAO 
found that ``the Mayor's performance report did not contain the 
following required information for any of the 542 agency goals 
identified in the plan: (1) actual performance compared with 
two levels of planned performance, and (2) titles of the 
management employee and immediate supervisor most responsible 
for achieving each goal.'' The GAO report also concluded that 
the city's performance accountability report ``does not 
describe, as required, the status of, or the steps taken to 
comply with, any of the court orders pertaining to the 12 civil 
actions concerning activities of the District government during 
fiscal year 1999.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ ``District of Columbia Government: Performance Report's 
Adherence to Statutory Requirements,'' General Accounting Office, April 
2000, GAO/GGD-00-107.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Regarding this GAO evaluation, it should be noted that the 
original law was drafted so that the Mayor would have both 
planning and reporting responsibility. But as noted in the GAO 
report, in 1997, Congress transferred the reporting 
responsibility to the Financial Responsibility and Management 
Assistance Authority (the Control Board). Then, in November 
1999, Congress returned this planning and reporting 
responsibility back to the Mayor. However, because of the 
temporary transfer in 1997, the Mayor's performance report for 
FY1999 was required to be based on goals that the Control 
Board--not the Mayor--had established. So rather than report on 
all of the Control Board's goals, the Mayor opted to focus his 
FY1999 performance accountability report on the short-term 
goals he had established after taking office in January 1999.
    Following the release of this GAO report, and a subsequent 
hearing by the Senate Subcommittee on Oversight of Government 
Management, Restructuring, and the District of Columbia on May 
9, 2000, the Mayor sent a letter to Senator George V. Voinovich 
(R-OH), Chairman of the Subcommittee, requesting changes to the 
performance accountability requirements. The request included 
changing the submission deadline for the submission of the 
performance accountability plan from March 1 to June 15, and 
eliminating the requirement for multiple goals for each 
performance measure.
    The latter request by the Mayor refers to the requirement 
in the Federal Payment Reauthorization Act of 1994 that 
requires the District to submit both acceptable and superior 
achievement goals for each performance measure. S. 3062 
streamlines the performance goal requirements that were 
initially established in the Federal Payment Reauthorization 
Act of 1994 by replacing the multiple levels of performance 
goals with one set of ambitious performance targets. This would 
clarify the goals District managers are expected to meet and 
align congressional mandates on the District with what is 
required of federal agencies.

                        III. Legislative History

    On May 9, 2000, the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government 
Management, Restructuring, and the District of Columbia held a 
hearing on the progress of performance management in the 
District, at which Mayor Williams proposed harmonizing the 
submission deadline for the District's budget and performance 
accountability plan to Congress, testifying that ``. . . the 
performance plan and the budget have to work together and 
really have to contain a lot of the same information, because 
modern budgeting is performance budgeting.''
    S. 3062 was introduced on September 18, 2000, by Senator 
Voinovich. It was cosponsored by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL). 
The bill was referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. 
Although the legislation would have appropriately been referred 
to the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, 
Restructuring, and the District of Columbia, the Subcommittee 
requested that the bill be held at full Committee in order to 
expedite its consideration. The legislation was ordered 
reported on September 27, 2000 by voice vote.

                    IV. Section-by-Section Analysis

    Section 1, paragraph 1 of the legislation addresses the 
District's performance accountability plan that is required by 
Congress prior to each fiscal year. Paragraph 1, subparagraph A 
of the legislation changes the March 1 deadline, instead 
requiring the Mayor to submit a performance accountability plan 
that is ``concurrent with the submission of the District of 
Columbia budget to Congress,'' beginning in 2001. Paragraph 1, 
subparagraph B of the legislation strikes the section of the 
law that requires the city to establish both superior and 
acceptable goals for the performance measures, replacing the 
multiple performance measures with one set of ``measurable, 
objective performance goals.''
    Section 1, paragraph 2 of the legislation makes similar 
technical changes to the performance accountability report as 
those made to the plan (the report evaluates the District's 
success in achieving the goals set in its performance 
accountability plan). Paragraph 2, subparagraph A of the 
legislation states that the changes to the report will take 
effect in 2001. Paragraph 2, subparagraph B of the legislation 
strikes the requirement that the Mayor must report on 
acceptable and superior levels of performance in the 
performance accountability report.

                    V. Estimated Cost of Legislation

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                Washington, DC, September 29, 2000.
Hon. Fred Thompson,
Chairman, Committee on Governmental Affairs,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 3062, a bill to 
modify the date on which the Mayor of the District of Columbia 
submits a performance accountability plan to the Congress, and 
for other purposes.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are John R. 
Righter (for federal costs), and Susan Sieg Tompkins (for the 
state and local impact).
            Sincerely,
                                          Barry B. Anderson
                                    (For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
    Enclosure.

S. 3062--A bill to modify the date on which the Mayor of the District 
        of Columbia submits a performance accountability plan to the 
        Congress, and for other purposes.

    S. 3062 would require that the Mayor of the District of 
Columbia submit the city's annual performance accountability 
plan to the Congress at the same time that he or she submits 
the city's budget. Currently, the Mayor must submit the report 
by March 1. In addition, the bill would require that the city 
prepare only one set of performance goals under the Government 
Performance Results Act. Currently, it must prepare two sets. 
CBO estimates that enacting S. 3062 would have no impact on the 
federal budget. The bill would not affect direct spending or 
receipts, so pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
    S. 3062 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 
The bill would amend the statutes of the District of Columbia 
to relax certain requirements for the timing and content of 
annual reports of managerial performance. While the District of 
Columbia may incur costs to change its data management systems, 
over the long term, the District would benefit from the 
narrower reporting requirements.
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are John R. 
Righter (for federal costs), and Susan Sieg Tompkins (for the 
state and local impact). This estimate was approved by Robert 
A. Sunshine, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                  VI. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact

    Pursuant to the requirement of paragraph 11(b) of Rule XXVI 
of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has 
considered the regulatory and paperwork impact of S. 3062. The 
legislation contributes to the efficient administration and 
management of the District of Columbia by facilitating the 
city's reporting requirements to Congress. It would impose no 
additional regulatory burdens, and should reduce paperwork and 
administrative burdens on the District of Columbia by 
streamlining the District's performance plan requirements. Over 
time, it should also reduce paperwork burdens on the District 
by tying together the performance plan and the budget into one, 
integrated document.

       VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by 
the Committee bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing 
law proposed to be omitted is shown in strikeout, new matter is 
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed 
is shown in roman):

 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SELF-GOVERNMENT AND GOVERNMENTAL REORGANIZATION 
                               ACT OF 1973

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                    TITLE IV--THE DISTRICT CHARTER

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



            Part D--District Budget and Financial Management

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                               Subpart 2--Audit

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SECTION 456. PERFORMANCE AND FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY.

    (a) Performance Accountability Plan.--
          (1) Submission of annual plan.--Concurrent with the 
        submission of the District of Columbia budget to 
        Congress each year (beginning with 2001), the Mayor 
        shall develop and submit to the Committee on Government 
        Reform and Oversight of the House of Representatives, 
        the Committee on Governmental Affairs of the Senate, 
        the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
        Representatives and the Senate, and the Comptroller 
        General a performance accountability plan for all 
        departments, agencies, and programs of the government 
        of the District of Columbia for the subsequent fiscal 
        year.
          (2) Contents of plan.--The performance accountability 
        plan for a fiscal year shall contain the following:
                  (A) A statement of measurable, objective 
                performance goals established for all 
                significant activities of the government of the 
                District of Columbia during the fiscal year 
                (including activities funded in whole or in 
                part by the District but performed in whole or 
                in part by some other public or private 
                entity).
                  (B) * * *
                  (C) * * *
          (3) * * *
    (b) Performance Accountability Report.--
          (1) Submission of report.--Not later than March 1 of 
        each year (beginning with 2001), the Mayor shall 
        develop and submit to the Committee on Government 
        Reform and Oversight of the House of Representatives, 
        the Committee on Governmental Affairs of the Senate, 
        the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
        Representatives and the Senate, and the Comptroller 
        General a performance accountability report on 
        activities of the government of the District of 
        Columbia during the fiscal year ending on the previous 
        September 30.
          (2) Contents of report.--The performance 
        accountability report for a fiscal year shall contain 
        the following:
                  (A) For each goal of the performance 
                accountability plan submitted under subsection 
                (a) [D.C. Code 47-231] for the year, a 
                statement of the actual level of performance 
                achieved compared to the stated goal.
                  (B) * * *
                  (C) * * *
                  (3) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *